Reduced German, Italian & Soviet Airpower involvement in Spanish Civil War?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

chris ballance

Airman 1st Class
151
145
Jul 21, 2022
What happens if German Italian, and the Soviet contribution to air war in Spain is radically reduced. The Ju 52s transpoerts in July 1936 have civlian pilots and only become bombers after Nationalist conversion. Same for the SM.81s from Italy. No active duty "volunteer" German, Italian, and Soviet pilots, ground crews, and other support untis are sent, just aircraft and maybe instructor pilots. All sides hold back sending their best fighter and bomber aircraft to types, or slow thier introduction. France follows the same policy and allows more aircraft, weapons, and supplies, but no units or cutting edge aircraft. The US allows aircraft sales to Spain. Mercenaries and volunteers are allowed into the fight on both sides. Does the Civil War end sooner or later? Is there any impact on WW2?
 
Italo-German support was IIRC more substantial that the Soviet support historically. Especially the Italians seem to be providing a lo, and on their own budget, while the Soviets were happy to get the Spanish gold in order for them to send the military stuff. So with 'foreigners' supporting the sides in a much lower amount, the Republicans might've prevailed. Especially with the French allowing for the greater help to get to the Republicans.

Impact on ww2 - Italians have a better budget and fuller warehouses? Republican Spain means what the Operation Torch can be more adventurous, reaching Tunis on the 1st go? British have an easier time supplying North Africa. Also, Germans have one agent less to provide them with tungsten.
 
Italo-German support was IIRC more substantial that the Soviet support historically. Especially the Italians seem to be providing a lo, and on their own budget, while the Soviets were happy to get the Spanish gold in order for them to send the military stuff. So with 'foreigners' supporting the sides in a much lower amount, the Republicans might've prevailed. Especially with the French allowing for the greater help to get to the Republicans.

Impact on ww2 - Italians have a better budget and fuller warehouses? Republican Spain means what the Operation Torch can be more adventurous, reaching Tunis on the 1st go? British have an easier time supplying North Africa. Also, Germans have one agent less to provide them with tungsten.
Without more vigerous support of the Germans and Italians, US oil companies might be a lot less likely to extend the Nationalist offers for buying oil on credit. That might have dramatically effected the not just the Nationalist airforce but also it's mobility on the ground in key periods of the war. However, I was really wondering if the air war would have turned into a more of stalemate? I was also wondering if all the fly time given to German and Italian pilots had any real impact on the war. It's unclear how many Soivet pilots benefited because some were caught up in the ending of the purge and mini purge that happened after the German Invasion in the summer of 1941. Is the on goining historial option that the benefits in AirPower tactics and technology tested in the war is overblown?
 
Could Franco have even reached the outskirts of Madrid in late 1936 without German & Italian pilots, ground crews, and logistical support? I guess the same goes for the Republicans, could they have held Madrid in the winter of 1936/37 without the injection of Soviet trained fighters and bombers units? You get the impression that the proganda effect alone was massive for the Republicans.
 
My (rather casual) observation of the news is that any external involvement in a civil war makes things worse, so less foreign involvement would end up being better for the Spanish people, as a whole. While the Nationalists still may have won, I think there would be a much more negotiated end, without quite so much post-war bloodletting.
 
Re Operation Torch. A Republican Spain would make it easier of course but the issue that was seen to require Moroccan landings was uncertainty over French military opposition. Otherwise it would be better to land at the other end of Algeria with all the troops and cut off Tunisia earlier. Although one must note that the roads to Tunisia at the time were poor, vulnerable to damage from heavy vehicles and the weather will be wet so terrain and logistics will still slow any movement.

IOTL had the Moroccan landing had to fight their way across Algeria to link up to the rest of the landings, it would be a slow and costly affair hampered by terrain, weather and constant attacks from excellent light infantry schooled and practiced in rapid tactical movement. The logistic capacity on the ground approaching Tunisia could be no greater limited as it was by the same terrain and weather constraints. We saw the French fight hard in Syria and the campaign in Madagascar lasted months. Spain had only a limited ability to intervene had it chosen to and was a far lesser hazard to Torch than France.
 
If Spain is Republican, would/could Germany have moved on Spain after the fall of France?
If Republican Spain had surrived until the June 1940, It would have been a very temping target for both Germans and Italians. Even if the British and French had help defeat the Nationists in 1939, a weakend Republicans would have had difficulty in resisting an invasion. Gibraltar would be the real prize. I don't know how the Briitsh would have held Gibraltar without the games Franco played with Hitler.
 
Perhaps avoiding the civilian British air transport that took Franco to mainland Spain might have had more influence?
However possibly the Italo German airlift of Nationalist troops from Spanish Morocco to Spain was more important.
Could operations like the Army of North Africa airlift could have occured with just German and Italian civilan pilots and aircraft under a nominal Nationalist command? How important was the logistical tail provided by the German and Italain airforces? The same goes for the Republicans when Franco was stopped at subburbs of Mardid in part by the arrival of Soviet fighters and bombers.
 
I was wondering about Gibraltar. It's a great fortress but resupply would have been a nightmare.
Depends..............................
The Axis did not take Malta.
Gibraltar was easier (not easy but easier than Malta) to resupply.
Supplying even a small army/air force in Spain was not going to be real easy from France or Italy.
British Navy/subs may have something to say about ship traffic on the Spanish Mediterranean coast.
There were two (?) rail lines between France and Spain. One on the west coast at the corner of the Bay of Biscay and the other on the Mediterranean coast about 500km away. Around 850-1000km by rail just in Spain.
Maybe you can use the port of Cartagena about 400-420km from Gibraltar?
A lot depends on how 'friendly' the Spanish are and what the Spanish think it will cost them?
Is Spain getting any food, fuel, raw materials from the Allies/neutrals?
Can Germany, Italy (and France?) make up for it?

edit. Spanish rail gauge was 1,668 mm ( 5 ft 521⁄32 in) which is not a big difference, but it does mean you can't just use French/German rail wagons on the Spanish rail lines.
Either transfer the "goods' over to Spanish wagons/carriages or figure out how to adjust on the wheel spacing on the cars while they are loaded (special cars?)
Spanish roads in 1940/41 are not good and much of Spain is hilly/mountainous.

Edit 2. At the start of WW II the British imposed system of inspections/clearances around the world for cargos headed for Spain. After June 1940 this got even stricter and the US agreed to limit oil shipments (being the major exporter of oil to Spain) of about 80% of the oil supply used by Spain in pre civil war days. If Spain did not stay neutral oil supplies could be cut off completely. Things were tightened up in the Spring/summer of 1941 with the German attack on Russia and the Spanish "volunteers. The US cut the oil supply by about 1/3rd. Other things may have been cut a little bit. The US sent inspectors to Spain to monitor Spanish oil consumption (none going to Germany).
Germany was unable/unwilling to send any oil to Spain.

Spain was being squeezed into neutrality and was facing economic ruin if it didn't at least come close to complying.
Spain was selling some raw material to both sides but Spain's survival was more closely tied to the Allies. Fuel for motor vehicles, ships, fishing boats, industry could not be replaced by coal alone or without significant industrial expense.

Perhaps the Axis could have taken Gibraltar, but perhaps the cost would have been an Allied invasion of Spain and not North Africa?
Granted getting past the Pyrenees mountains would have been very difficult but Allied bases in Spain would also have change the dynamic.
Germans had not been as supportive of Franco as the Italians had been, much more cash orientated than credit or gift.
 
Last edited:
If Republican Spain had surrived until the June 1940, It would have been a very temping target for both Germans and Italians. Even if the British and French had help defeat the Nationists in 1939, a weakend Republicans would have had difficulty in resisting an invasion. Gibraltar would be the real prize. I don't know how the Briitsh would have held Gibraltar without the games Franco played with Hitler.
Spain could have ended up the same sort of quagmire for Hitler as it had for Napoleon. The Republicans and Nationalists may have hated each other less than a foreign invader.
 
I wondered what would have happened if the Allies go all in and help the Republicans how that affects World War 2?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back